Scotland voted to remain part of the UK, warts and all - no preconditions were made, no caveats were offered, no offers of another vote if things changed. A simple one time only deal, are you in, or are you out? They chose in.
From the SNP 2016 manifesto:
We believe that the Scottish Parliament should have the right to hold another referendum if there is clear and sustained evidence that independence has become the preferred option of a majority of the Scottish people – or if[b] there is a significant and material change in the circumstances that prevailed in 2014, such as Scotland being taken out of the EU against our will[/b].
They stood on a promise in the 2016 Scottish parliament election - which they won, and have formed a government alongside the pro-indy Greens - to hold a second referendum, or at least to look at holding one, in the event of Brexit where Scotland voted to remain, which is what happened.
That's apart from the fact that during the run-up to the first indyref there was a lot of talk about Scotland being ejected from the EU in the event of leaving the UK, making their membership of the EU a big part of staying in the UK.
The SNP - and the greens - have a strong democratic and moral argument for holding a second referendum based on those two facts.
* NB - Despite being an English resident in Scotland, I don't really have a firm view on Scottish independence.
Do you have any evidence that anyone actually voted on remaining in the EU as a primary motivation for voting no, or are you simply rationalising in hindsight.
I don't have any figures to offer you, but anecdotally it was the prime motivation of those in my social circle that voted Yes.
Personally I would have voted No, if I had been eligible to vote, as I was unconvinced by the SNP's plan. But the EU issue was main argument that made me consider a Yes vote.
the vote was based around being part of a UK of which being a member of the EU was an intrinsic factor
As I have repeatedly pointed out, Brexit was a known risk factor before the indyref, to the extent that Salmond specifically used it as a campaign issue in favour of yes.
It was just one of the [b]many[/b] issues that were known to be uncertainties at the time, and factored into the voting, that resulted in a decision to stay in the UK. Warts and all.
Just imagine if the boot was on the other foot, and you had voted to leave the UK - would there have been a second referendum when the EU decided you couldn't automatically remain part of the EU (as claimed by the SNP) after all? I would happily bet my left bollock that there wouldn't be!
Frightened? Bored more like.
This. Salmond said it was a once in a lifetime chance, except if he lost. SNP had 2 years to make their arguments including scenarios including the UK leaving the EU which was discussed at length. The SNP as Cameronnsaid aren't really interested in using the powers they've been granted as if (when) they fail the Scottish people will see them for who they are. Its much easier to blame "Westminster" for everything.
@kimber currencies move around +/- 10% a lot. The travel company relocated to Spain in 2013 and the CAA advised people not to book with them as they where no longer ATOL protected.
To judge Brexit on the basis of what happens in the immediate aftermath is just plain daft. We will be much much better off in the future than if we'd stayed in. It's inconceivable to me the £ will be weaker than the euro in 2 or 3 years. The EU thought we'd not vote Leave so they offered nothing. A clear indication of their arrogance. People throughout Europe reject the project but countires will not grant a referendum, its anti-democratic.
No where else in the world has a trade zone which has morphed intoma political union project
We should never ever have signed the Maastrict treaty let alone Lisbon
You only need to look at the EU ref voting to see how confused Scotland is about the matter.
When will you stop whining? You have a significant devolved powers that you struggle to use already and the benefits of being part of a wider economic union (that works) that protects you against the fragility of the economic foundations. And instead of enjoying what you have, it's lets NOW argue for less independence, monetary, fiscal and political union with a European state that is out of/rarely in synch with our own economy's etc.
It's like watching spoilt little children.....I
Brexit was a known risk factor before the indyref, to the extent that Salmond specifically used it as a campaign issue in favour of yes.
So why are you also trying to pretend that no one based their vote on it then?
[url= http://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/politics/scottish-independence-ten-key-issues-1-3542039 ]Scottish Indepenence: 10 key issues (Edinburgh Evening News, Sept 2014)[/url]: Issue 3 - EU membership.
We all know that if the SNP lost a second indref, then within days the campaign for a third indyref would begin in earnest, and so ad infinitum
And what do you think UKIP would have done if they lost the EU ref? That's democracy for you.
@ ninfan,
Just because you keep on repeating it, doesn't make it true: the fact that Scotland so unanimously voted to stay in the EU gives clear indication that either the EU referendum was not a factor for indyref voters or, like many many Brexiters, no one actually thought it would realistically come to pass.
thm: I'm not sure if you are describing Scotland in the UK or the UK in the EU?
Could be either. 😀
Believe it or not, scots are not alone in having to deal with the folly of the Brexit vote. But the die has been cast. Time to get on with life and deal with the hand that has been played. No one afford to keep bleating on ad infinitum, especially with such an absurdly contradictory argument.
How about getting on with using the significant devolved powers that you have now? How about access of the less privileged to education and health services. At some point [b]the record not the rhetoric will come under scrutiny [/b]and you might as well address these issues while the attention is elsewhere and before it's too late!
Radio 4 Piece. Thanks for posting that it was very interesting, 27 minutes well spent. Made some notes on it last night but the Turkish Coup somewhat overtook posting them. Those listenig to just the first few minutes wouod have missed much (editor knows how to cut it together eh ? Rather obnoxious I thought to almost taunt the lady who was trying as best she could to explain her logic and she had a clear logic)
The academics / journalists analysis was very interesting and revealing. They did acknowledge that researchers got their pre Referendum analysis very wrong and that so e of their post Brexit comments bordered on obnoxious trivialising people's logic for voting Leave which was well thoughtout.
Warrington. 80/20 Leave. A classic Labour heartland overwhelmingly Leave, as the piece says Laboir is not communicating with these voters.
Immigration. Its been a major issue (top 3) for 10-15 years, academics admitted they coach politicans to say atuff like "yes we understand its a real issue for you" but people have seen they've actually done nothing. As such when it came to the referendum Remain had zero credibility on the issue
Researchers pre Brexit "key indicators" for how people would vote was proven to be rubbish (classic steriotyping). People wo voted Leave had the following values whuch I endorse 100%
Strong sense of community
Support rule of law and order
Voting Leave they believe is a heroic and patriotic act
Message of "Take Control" was very powerful
There was an element of wanting to "kick the South" in the North of the country who feel Remain was a London centered benefit (note to thise here who cinstanty whine about London you've helped ferment this attitude and result)
Very interesting discussion about how areas which receive eu grants still voted out. Reference to behavioiral studies "ultimatum game" - people will not accept "scraps" or payoffs/amount os mkney they think is unfair. They will reject money amd woukd rather take nothing than something they perceive to be unfair. This sums up the EU. Manynjere are bribed by getting back 55% of oir own money as so ehow that's a "result"
Kimber - sorry too late to edit after writing other mamoth post
Yes of course I acknowledge there is some short term pain and disruption. I wish we couod just get out immediateiy and get on with the job in hand of building the future. However thats not how its going to be. I voted Leave for a brighter future whuch I think more people will see very clearly in a few years time.
Voting Leave they believe is a heroic and patriotic act
Message of "Take Control" was very powerful
Hahahahhahaahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
What a load of crap.
There was an element of wanting to "kick the South" in the North of the country who feel Remain was a London centered benefit (note to thise here who cinstanty whine about London you've helped ferment this attitude and result)
Never has the phrase "cutting your nose of, to spite your face" rung so true as it does now.
Scottish Indepenence: 10 key issues (Edinburgh Evening News, Sept 2014): Issue 3 - EU membership
Thanks, you just proved my point:
[i]EUROPE
YES: The Scottish Government says Scotland will be able to agree terms for continuing membership before independence takes effect, allowing a smooth transition. It says there is no way Scotland can be forced to join the euro. [b]And it says staying in the UK carries the risk of Scotland being forced to leave the EU against its will if the Tories hold a referendum and the vote is to pull out.[/b]
NO: Better Together claim Scotland would face delays and hurdles in gaining membership of the EU as an independent country. It argues Scotland would lose many of the opt-outs which the UK has negotiated for itself and might have to sign up to the euro. And it warns that countries such as Spain and Belgium, which have their own independence-seeking areas, would not want to encourage new states.[/i]
So, once again, they knew that this might happen, they were warned, and they chose to stay party of the UK regardless.
As I challenged before - would there have been a second referendum if the better together predictions came true?
GrahamS - Member
thm: I'm not sure if you are describing Scotland in the UK or the UK in the EU?Could be either.
No it could not. THAT'S THE POINT.
Jambas, many are bribed!!! Don't you mean many are fooled into believing Brexit BS. The extent of the rapid backtracking and the pretence that delaying A50 is part of a tactic rather that a reflection of how piss poorly prepared we are for the chaos that you lot have caused.
Never has the phrase "cutting your nose of, to spite your face" rung so true as it does now.
I can't think of a more British characteristic.
I can't think of a more British characteristic.
other than losing at international football, you're right 😆
Are you talking about rUK there Mikey? 😉
How about getting on with using the significant devolved powers that you have now? How about access of the less privileged to education and health services.
You mean like using those powers to prevent tuition fees and prescription charges?
. I wish we couod just get out immediateiy and get on with the job in hand of building the future. However thats not how its going to be. I voted Leave for a brighter future whuch I think more people will see very clearly in a few years time.
So lads, pick up the tools, today we are building a brighter future any questions?
What does that look like?
Do we have the right tools to do it?
Do we have any plans?
Do we know what we are doing?
What is a brighter future?
What are the foundations of this brighter future going to be made of?
And firstly what are we going to bulldoze our way through to make it?
I can't be bothered to find the leave director vs commons select committee again where he said of course it's lies otherwise nobody would do it.
Are you talking about rUK there Mikey?
Sorry, ENGLISH trait 😆
Reality versus rhetoric Graham. Enlighten us about the access (real not theoretical) to tertiary education in Scotland. What has ACTUALLY happened, not what the SNP would like you to think what's happened?
@mikey Scotland voted for Remain for many complex reasons imho. It is not my view they voted Remain because they think the EU itself is a good idea.
If SNP believed so much in the EU they would have been willing to dicsuss then[b]possibility[/b] of adopting the euro ?
Scottish SNP voters got the message that voting Remain was a clear (the only ?) route to another referendum should the UK vote Leave - free option
Many Scots (SNP) like the fact that Westmister is subservient to the EU Commission as such they are strongly in favour
Immigration. Its been a major issue (top 3) for 10-15 years, academics admitted they coach politicans to say atuff like "yes we understand its a real issue for you" but people have seen they've actually done nothing. As such when it came to the referendum Remain had zero credibility on the issue
What is the "major issue" with immigration that people speak of? It seems more like a massively confused issue for a lot of voters, which conveniently masks other issues more than anything. What realistic changes could be implemented to satisfy those who see immigration as a "major issue" and what more credibility do Leave have (genuine questions)?
As I challenged before - would there have been a second referendum if the better together predictions came true?
Who knows?
Similarly if the EU turned around tomorrow and said "We don't want you to leave. We'll give you all those concessions you wanted after all" then don't you think our Brexit position would be reconsidered?
Brexit is 100% happening @mike, it will be done and dusted prior to the next GE in 2020 (imo)
It is not my view they voted Remain because they think the EU itself is a good idea.
So you go around accusing Remainers of belittling Brexit voters and yet you are quite willing to do the same about those who voted to remain. Talk about hypocrisy.
What realistic changes could be implemented to satisfy those who see immigration as a "major issue"?
Reality versus rhetoric Graham. Enlighten us about the access (real not theoretical) to tertiary education in Scotland. What has ACTUALLY happened, not what the SNP would like you to think what's happened?
Eh? Are you suggesting the tuition fees and prescription charges are not reality? Because I'm pretty sure they are.
As for access to tertiary education, you might enjoy this article:
Scotland is the best educated country in Europe, according to a report released by the Office for National Statistics.It says that nearly 45 per cent of people in Scotland aged between 25 and 64 have had some kind of tertiary education – including university degrees and further education — ahead of Ireland, Luxembourg and Finland, which were the only other countries to get more than 40 per cent.
[b]“In terms of the proportion of the population going into higher and tertiary education, Scotland actually has just about the highest in the world,”[/b] ONS chief economic adviser Joe Grice told ITV News
Interesting Graham but not really answering the question - at least from a LW interest in accessibility
The gap in university participation between young people from the most and least advantaged areas is higher in Scotland than in the other home nations
Although
although it has closed more quickly than elsewhere.
Grant you that, but....in the socialist utopia of SNP Scotland...
Scottish 18 year olds from the most advantaged areas are still more than four times more likely to go straight to university than those from the least advantaged areas. In England, those from the most advantaged areas are 2.4 times as likely to go to university as those from the least, and three times as likely in Wales and Northern Ireland.
Plus...
Academically selective Scottish universities are at least as socially selective as similar types of institution in other parts of the UK. Students from managerial and professional backgrounds (NS-SEC 1-3) are over-represented in highly selective universities in both Scotland and England, and this gap has not narrowed between 1996 and 2014.
Reality not rhetoric
Brexit is 100% happening
Then politicians are even worse than the electorate.
The tyranny of stupidity - discuss.
[quote=oldnpastit ]An indyref2 wouldn't make any sense until the terms of Brexit are known. Otherwise people in Scotland would be voting on a mixture of lies, wild guesses and fanciful promises, which doesn't sound very democratic.
What exactly do you think led to this sistuation
Actually was that poes law in action?
@mikey Scotland voted for Remain for many complex reasons imho. It is not my view they voted Remain because they think the EU itself is a good idea.
Jambyland gets weirder by the day.]
You must be trolling as that is just nuts
Brexit is 100% happening @mike, it will be done and dusted prior to the next GE in 2020 (imo)
It the most likely but its by no means a certainty and i would be very surprised if any leader wanted to make the GE also a referendum on the negotiations which are highly unlikely to lead to all the BS that was promised to voters.
I think its more likely it will be after unless she triggers Article 50 soon ish
The tyranny of stupidity - discuss.
It's that or a dictatorship.
Surely if we follow the example of the Leave campaign, getting on with it, means turning our back on the whole thing, realising that it was a huge mistake. In the meantime jobs will be lost, less income for UK government, more cuts to services and more misery for the people already struggling.
teamhurtmore - Memberalthough it has closed more quickly than elsewhere.
Which is how you measure success. You know this perfectly well... Scotland started from behind but the progress we've made in closing that gap is a success not a criticism. (of course, it's not all due to the SNP or even the Scottish Government, it's a long term success story)
Also, comparisons with the rest of the UK are generally skewed because of Scotland's greater use of college-university articulation. This is touched on here:
but the significance of "straight to university" is misunderstood."Scottish 18 year olds from the most advantaged areas are still more than four times more likely to go [b]straight to university[/b] than those from the least advantaged areas."
A huge proportion of articulating and associate students- those not going straight to university but via college- are from disadvantaged backgrounds- it's a route to university that's proved hugely effective for widening access but it's ignored outright when you choose to only look at "straight to university". The method of comparison favours one system over the other and ironically penalises the more effective method.
You also need to be careful of stats here because if you compare [i]university [/i]numbers rather than [i]higher education[/i] numbers, you miss out students who're in the college phase of an associate or similar degree program. 2-2 students are essentially underrepresented by 50% in this way (they're only counted in the last 2 years of 4), but they just degree level students approaching their degree from a different angle. Again these numbers include a much higher quantity of MD20 and 40 students so undercounting them skews things further. As a rule of thumb, this alone equates to a designed-in 10% under-representation of students from MD20 households. Kids don't stop being important just because they didn't go straight to uni.
It gets much harder to compare graduations and grades which is a shame because that would be a far more valuable statistic- we know that academic flexibility and funding for MD20 students is a good way to get them [i]into[/i] university, but not necessarily a good way to get them a degree. Whereas articulation and similar routes improve outcomes not just entrants- as an MD20 student, statistically you're better to go to college then university than you are to go directly to university and so a huge amount of effort is invested there (roughly a 50% increase in the last 5 years). It doesn't show up as well in some stats, but that's OK because the point isn't to do well at stats.
Not being funny but this is something we've talked about before and I keep having to explain the same things. Scotland and the RUK have different education systems so simplistic comparisons are sketchy. And unfortunately many of the simplistic comparisons skew things in the same direction and under-represent or entirely disregard some of our most effective methods, because they're not simple. Perfect example, having multiple routes into university is a great thing but your quote about "straight to university" manages to turn it into a criticism. Our students wouldn't be well served by changing that just to make the stats look nicer.
(aside; I've talked a lot about college here; the first person to come out with the "college places are falling in Scotland" line is getting a chinese burn. This is a long post already but if your understanding of the numbers is that bad, please inform yourself first... And if you do understand the numbers but want to misrepresent them, then bugger off, Willie Rennie)
less income for UK government, more cuts to services
Don't worry, we can just borrow money and spend our way out of the problem - Keynesian economics, innit?
Actually think Jamby's on to something there. Anecdotally, there was a lot of messaging on fb in the run-up to the EU referendum about the possibility of a second indyref in the event of Scotland voting to stay in in the event of Brexit. Whether it's enough to explain a 15% swing from the rest of the UK I don't know, but plenty of the 45 never gave up the fight! I don't really think the Scots are inherently any more pro-European than, say, the Welsh, but I think the SNP tap into the anti-establishment mood and blend it with nationalism/latent anti-English sentiment, which is why they're so popular.
Time to get on with life and deal with the hand that has been played.
I live in a democracy, and will call for, and campaign for, and vote for, change, as I see fit.
That "change" is now either to change path, and stay in the EU, or to get some kind of (poorer) EEA type partnership to keep access to our local international market, and to try and keep borders open for people to work and live where they want.
Either way, I accept that "most" people have voted for less open borders, less cooperation, but that doesn't mean I need to just shut up and sit back.
People keep voting for governments that propose privatisation of infrastructure, social housing, essential functions of state like the land registry, but that doesn't mean that I have to quietly "deal with the hand that was played." In a democracy you can argue for, and try to acheive, change for the better, not just accept the current path most recently voted for. Keep the ideas and views flowing, don't give in.
You live in the world as it is AND you argue and vote to improve it.
I think now is the time for a serious constitutional rethink on the future of the UK be that a federal system or independence for the home nations. I would be more than happy to see the UK as a union consigned to the history books - its day is over and done.
There was an element of wanting to "kick the South" in the North of the country who feel Remain was a London centered benefit
I think if you look at the results map that's a bit simplistic. Manchester Liverpool and Newcastle are all pretty far North. It seems to me that (generalisation here) cosmopolitan areas (which tend to be more multi cultural than rural areas whilst still managing to be reasonably affluent) were more likely to vote remain. Poorer suburban areas may have a similar ethnic mix but with non of the affluence and they tended to vote leave.
As a Mod Studies teacher,that was a good summary of how the gap has closed NW,thanks. THM,any questions,or would you like to compliment the fantastic work done by the Scottish Government( and schools and other agencies) in closing the gap?
Glitchy McBump
@slowoldman that's what the R4 piece said and also some of my friends from the North (who voted Remain) said they thought people there had voted Leave at least in part to "spite" London/The City and Cameron
My part of the world. Good article from the LRB by Dawn Carter - sleeping in bus shelters; welcome to the post Brexit future.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dawn Foster
An Oxfam staffer offered to pick me up from Cardiff Central. The bus service is so depleted and irregular in the Dulais Valley in South Wales that it’s pointless trying to use it for short trips. For people in Banwen, jobs are few and far between, and the lack of public transport doesn’t help. I heard of one case in which Amazon was offering a day’s work on zero-hours contracts at one of its nearby warehouses. They only let you know on the day itself whether or not you’re needed, but the text message they send out arrives too late for you to get the first bus. Rather than risk losing the work, several locals slept in a bus shelter the night before on the off-chance they would be needed.
Outside London, Wales has the highest relative poverty rate anywhere in the UK: one in four adults and one in three children are living below the breadline. Disability rates are alarmingly high, especially in the valleys, down in part to the number of people previously engaged in physically stressful manual work, but there are also high rates of depression. Wales needs infrastructure, and the jobs that would follow. The EU has poured a sizeable sum into Welsh development in the past few decades. Yet in the referendum 52.5 per cent of Welsh voters chose Leave.
In Newport, my home town, Ukip came second in the 2015 general election. I left in 2006, and remember hearing locals grumble back then that Labour thought the seat too safe to be worth their attention. In 2010, the Labour vote dropped by 6.5 per cent in Wales. The Blair years had been positive for Wales at first, but poverty rates remained stubborn, and the jobs that did materialise were often low paid or didn’t last – outsourced to India, like the evening call-centre job I had during my A-Levels. When the coalition government undertook its programme of cuts, benefit sanctions and the bedroom tax fell especially hard on Wales, which has a surplus of family homes and relatively few small dwellings. Jessica Morden, the MP for Newport East, conducted research showing that 51 per cent of people who weren’t in arrears before the bedroom tax was levied, were six months later. Yet many Labour MPs remained reluctant to come out against austerity.
The many people in Wales who have spoken to me see that their own lives are getting harder, and that their children’s future is bleak. They’ve had Labour MPs for decades, under Labour governments and Tory governments, but nothing very much has happened to change their lives or bring jobs. When Tata Steel announced potential job losses in Port Talbot, it merely felt like a continuation of the story that began with the closing of the mines, and the repeated downsizing and mothballing of the steelworks in Newport. Ukip do especially well in Wales because they are seen as anti-establishment. Nigel Farage might have gone to Dulwich College, but he didn’t go to university, and presents himself very differently from the Oxbridge set. Direct democracy offers the opportunity of a protest vote for the disgruntled, especially in the safe seats of Wales: voting to leave was a chance to be heard for once, to kick back at Westminster and the vast majority of Welsh MPs who voted to remain in the EU. And it worked: Wales was heard. And its economic future has been scuppered.
Our new PM has given the three Brexit facing jobs in cabinet to Boris,Davies and Fox all strong leave supporters and as some one printed out the gap between ability and will is huge for these three (who all have egos to feed) it is obvious that the PM has chucked the ball back to those who had left the field? So when the three muppeteers have to give into free movement to get a trade and reciprocal rights deal it will be for them to explain themselves to their electorate, the simple fact that these three accepted these jobs indicates how ****ing dumb they are
Interesting poll (always taken with a pinch of salt) published by the Independent. Australian trade approach covered in many papers now too. We won't be agreeing freedom of movement for international trade and nor should we with Europe. I am happy with no trade deal with Europe if that requires freedom of movement or any budget contribution at all. They should pay us.
[img] 
[/img]
